Suggestions

[quote name="Mrsquidgereen" date="2021-06-30 16:11:07" ] I initially read the title as Floaties, aka those little things you put on to float in water. I am in favor of both this and the actual subject of the thread. I feel one of the potential cons of this would be what people have been saying about how it might incentivise players to ask for more and more decorative/apparel items for ancients, but those suggestions already pop up a lot anyway. [/quote] One of the reasons why, and I think I have said it before, I feel these should be reclassified as 'environment or foreground' and should not be exclusive to the dragon image itself is that it would separate these items from current 'apparel' and be a whole new class of objects. Yes, there would be some that would say 'why can't we get X' but it can be pointed out that these are NOT apparel (and to separate further, and compromise with those who like those types of apparel items as they are now, don't touch the apparel sets, bring out brand new 'falls' and foreground scenes.) These would be exactly like scenes, except in stead of being layered behind the dragon, they would be layered in front. One image for every single dragon pose, so when new breeds come out, absolutely nothing has to be done with regards to foreground items. Just plug the dragon data into the code and go. This way players who don't want the rest of the lair space touched still have the regular flower falls to use, and don't have to use foreground items, and it would, as said above, be a further divide between 'apparel' and 'scenic items'

Totally support!
Ancients without skincents often feel just so empty, that little detail of a floating apparel would be an amazing addition. Since we're at it we could use some more of it, I love these

I support this but would prefer to have them classified as "foreground items" rather than apparel.

Support, but only for the foreground idea. Background would require redrawing the apparel, which should be avoided.

[quote name="WolfByte" date="2021-07-03 08:31:01" ] Support, but only for the foreground idea. Background would require redrawing the apparel, which should be avoided. [/quote] @WolfByte Would it? If I were to put an existing asset in the background of an already existing artwork, I'd simply move its layer to the bottom, and [i]maybe[/i] do very slight adjustments to help it look a bit nicer. May I ask why you think that it being in the background would require a redraw?

[quote name="benneyfreeman" date="2021-07-03 14:37:53" ] [quote name="WolfByte" date="2021-07-03 08:31:01" ] Support, but only for the foreground idea. Background would require redrawing the apparel, which should be avoided. [/quote] WolfByte Would it? If I were to put an existing asset in the background of an already existing artwork, I'd simply move its layer to the bottom, and [i]maybe[/i] do very slight adjustments to help it look a bit nicer. May I ask why you think that it being in the background would require a redraw? [/quote] It would probably depend on exactly how the dragon generating and back/fore grounds work. Right now, if these stay as apparel, then yeah, it would have to be redrawn, because from what I have seen, the dragon is the 'bottom' layer and doesn't allow apparel to be layered behind it. (and would require a lot of recoding for basically little true ability/difference, since most of the winds/flowerfalls would be nearly completely obscured by the dragon with only a little bit peeking out.) As a foreground object, it might be the same issue, but would have a bit more leniency with the ability to have the potential to layer the items behind the dragon. As a foreground would be a new classification, they could use that opportunity to give the ability to layer things behind the dragon, but it might also be something that it either has to be behind the dragon (such as scenes) layered on the dragon image (apparel/skins/genes), or in front of the dragon (as a foreground item but not attached to the actual dragon) I personally would prefer for it to be a brand new classification, and if that comes with the proviso that it only can go in front (due to how pages are structured), then I would be fine (but then again, I also want foregrounds to be able to compliment scenes, and thus go all the way across the scene, rather than be focused on the dragon only)

[quote name="benneyfreeman" date="2021-07-03 14:37:53" ] [quote name="WolfByte" date="2021-07-03 08:31:01" ] Support, but only for the foreground idea. Background would require redrawing the apparel, which should be avoided. [/quote] WolfByte Would it? If I were to put an existing asset in the background of an already existing artwork, I'd simply move its layer to the bottom, and [i]maybe[/i] do very slight adjustments to help it look a bit nicer. May I ask why you think that it being in the background would require a redraw? [/quote] I should have been more clear about how I don’t know if the coding allows for easy image movement between the foreground and background. If turning the art from foreground to background is as easy as dragging the images around, then I think a background option is very doable. If it is far more difficult, then I don’t think it would be worth the trouble.

How would it work? Like, the feature interface.

Can you layer foregrounds/backgrounds? How many slots is reasonable for each one?

Should floating apparel from larger sets be reclassified, like the sage lanterns, or would that be too confusing?

Thinking about it, I'm gonna have to say no support for reclassifying any current items. Not everyone puts the floaty things on the top of of all the other Apparel, or uses only one floater, so removing these from how Apparel works is likely to cause some problems for a lot of outfits

It's a nice idea, but I'm not sure it's really all that feasible.

I support, unless it would require an unreasonable amount of reworking. Could be called 'atmospheres' or something similar?